But $20 for the entry CabernetOk yeah the quality fits for sure but this will not get to the Entry or Budget drinkers...

They have the Canaan Red & white for that and people love them...

All below $11 and you get what you pay and most bottles better. (At these prices none are on sale that means something too, when no-one has to hunt the deal THEN it is a true QPR) World wines with real value for the budget person ...

Elie - OU or OK, what else matters? There have been some Israeli and Chilean wines that have appeared on the market with Israeli supervision only, but I have gone to many stores in NY - if it is in the store people buy it. Rarely do they even check. The only real worry recently has been shmitta wines for Israel wines, otherwise - OU/OK/or Badatz, etc - meaning - who cares?

David Raccah wrote:Elie - OU or OK, what else matters? There have been some Israeli and Chilean wines that have appeared on the market with Israeli supervision only, but I have gone to many stores in NY - if it is in the store people buy it. Rarely do they even check. The only real worry recently has been shmitta wines for Israel wines, otherwise - OU/OK/or Badatz, etc - meaning - who cares?

Long gone are the days of Triangle K or the such,David

David: There are plenty of people who won't rely on the OU or on some of the Israeli hechsheirim. Yehoshua, am I wrong?Moreover, if you want to get your wine into a restaurant under a certain hashgacha, it must be acceptable to that hashgacha, so for instance, an OK restaurant can't just serve an OU wine without verifying with the mashgiach that it's on OK's approved list. Same for wedding halls, etc. Beyond politics, there are substantive differences as to what temperature is required for a wine to be considered mevushal, with the OU following Rabbi Feinstein's more lenient opinion, which may not be acceptable to other hechsherim (including the Israeli Rabbinate for that matter). My understanding is that this is becoming less of an issue with the improvement of flash-pasteurization technology. Now a wine can be quickly heated beyond its boiling point (~89C/192F) for about 3 seconds and instantly cooled, so the days of debating whether wine pasteurized at 168F is mevushal may be behind us.

The discussion's beginning to range far and wide and away from the original post. So I might as well add to allk that.

Here in the US, wine prices for Israelis wines are generally higher than those in Israel and we have a more limited selection (certainly true here in the San Francisco area). Have tried some Recanati wines and find that in general they provide good QPR under $ 20 unless you're looking for ageability beyond a couple of years. Few Dalton wines available here in general, and even fewer under $ 20.

But the discussion has focused almost entirley on red wines, as well as ageability. And I'd like to move off the question of Israeli wines and into osher wines in general. And if we had a moderator, he or she could toss out my comment as off the subject, but we don't, so I feel free to digress.

Craig Winchell wrote:Elie, just a quick point. The OU's shitta is well above Rav Moshe's. I've never seen a wine lechatchila use Rav Moshe's, and I cannot even imagine it bedieved.

Craig: Thanks for clarifying that. In any event, their shitta is more meikil than the Tzelemer Rav's shita, which is followed by chassidishe hashgochos. But my understanding is that with the new and improved flash pasteurization technologies, many (most? all?) OU wines meet the higher standard as well. Am I mistaken?

It has nothing to do with technology, only the desires of the winery and/or hashgacha. The technology has been mainstream for at least 30 years. In a nutshell, non of the normative shittas hold that wine must be boiled- in that, they are all like Rav Moshe. Rav Moshe holds to yad soledes, which in his opinion is about 80 degrees C, lechatchila (bedieved, it's lower still). The OU holds 85 degrees, the Tzelemer Rav, 90 degrees. Considering that at sea level, a wine would need to be 14.85 % alcohol to actually boil at 90 degrees, we see that only pretty alcoholic wines would be boiling under the Tzelemer's shittah, not normal table wines. The argument might be that in a normal pot at that temperature, vapor could be detected wafting from the wine. The fact is that that could be done at much lower temperatures as well, and the physical chemistry associated with phase change in liquids has been known for centuries. Another argument is that current HTST systems, such as are normally used for wine bishul, are closed systems. At least one regional hashgacha (KAJ) requires a slight leakage between heating and cooling phases of the operation, in order to be assured that there is some loss due to evaporation. Looking at it objectively, that is the only shittah that is much different. When dealing with temperatures below the boiling point of the liquid, the only difference is the misconception of a "safety net" in the higher temperature shittas, and hashgachas trying to out-frum each other. In reality, the choices that should be made are a) below boiling point a1) closed system or a2) open system, b) at or above the boiling point b1) closed system or b2) open system.

I re-reading what I posted yesterday, I am not sure I made my point. None of the shittas normally used for wine require wine to reach the boiling point-- as I said, even the Tzelemer's shitta, though higher than the OU's temperature, is not boiling for most wines. There are poskim who require actual boiling, but I don't think there are any commercial wines being made under those poskim. Therefore, the differences in the shittas currently in use are just about meaningless, except for the KAJ, which requires an open system (with vapor leaking out). I therefore don't think of the Tzelemer's as a "higher standard", but just a higher temperature, still not boiling. It seems that above the minimal temperature required to cook something (Sous-vide cooking will cook meat at quite low temperatures) and below actual boiling, the temperatures required by the different poskim are quite arbitrary.

I wonder how it's done at Teperberg winery as all the wines in the silver series are mevushal yet still pretty decent for the price (about $10) with the hechsher of badatz ha'eda hacharedit and I've never heard of any "better" hashgacha (it's all politics anyway yet I'm polite and well-mannered so I won't elaborate further on the topic...). I've a bunch of tasting notes to post but I'll post them later as I'm exhausted after having handled what was probably the most wine-infused wedding in Israel's history...

Craig Winchell wrote:I re-reading what I posted yesterday, I am not sure I made my point. None of the shittas normally used for wine require wine to reach the boiling point-- as I said, even the Tzelemer's shitta, though higher than the OU's temperature, is not boiling for most wines. There are poskim who require actual boiling, but I don't think there are any commercial wines being made under those poskim. Therefore, the differences in the shittas currently in use are just about meaningless, except for the KAJ, which requires an open system (with vapor leaking out). I therefore don't think of the Tzelemer's as a "higher standard", but just a higher temperature, still not boiling. It seems that above the minimal temperature required to cook something (Sous-vide cooking will cook meat at quite low temperatures) and below actual boiling, the temperatures required by the different poskim are quite arbitrary.

Craig: No offense but I think it's rather presumptuous of you to be deciding what shitas are arbitrary. This is a serious machlokes with the gedolei haposkim having weighed in with various opinions. I'm not aware of any shita that wine must reach a rolling boil (ma'ale ababuos) to be considered mevushal. The question is, how hot is considered "cooked." The majority opinion of rishonim is that it must be nechsar--some must be lost to evaporation. (The minority opinion is that any "heated" wine is mevushal even if it's not nechsar.) Rav Moshe's opinion is a big chidush as he extrapolates from hilchos shabos where yad soledes is considered mevushal to wine, where it must be nechsar. Most poskim require that it reach a point where it begins to simmer--i.e., evaporate rapidly. The debate among poskim (aside from Rav Moshe and those--like Rav Auerebach and Rav Elyashiv--who hold that the color and/or taste of the wine must be affected) is at what temperature is there sufficient evaporation to be considered nechsar.

Thus, contrary to your conclusion, the choices that should be made are 1) temperature and 2) duration/effect on wine's taste and color--with longer cooking necessary to satisfy Rav Aurebach and Rav Elyashiv's shita. (As an aside, many have already pointed out that Rav Elyashiv's shita is based on misinformation--he writes that he was told that commercial wine is routinely pasteurized, which is simply wrong.) Since almost no one is machmir on 2, the difference between the hechsherim is on 1.

On another note, you were incorrect on several counts in your comments yesterday:

1. The OU does in fact rely on Rav Moshe's shita: "Contemporary poskim address two major questions about Yayin Mevushal (cooked wine). The first is: To what temperature must the wine have been heated to classify it as “cooked”? This is a subject of dispute. The OU’s policy is to follow the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein and require a cooking temperature of 175 degrees F. The second question is: Can we consider pasteurized wine to be Mevushal? Maran Hagaon Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and [l’havdil bein chayyim l’chayyim] Rav Elyashiv maintain (for different reasons) that wine is not to be considered Mevushal merely by dint of being pasteurized. The prevalent practice in America is to follow the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein, who maintains that pasteurized wine is indeed Mevushal."http://www.oukosher.org/index.php/commo ... sekeepers/

(Regarding what you said about l'chatchila/b'dieved, Rav Moshe cites 3 different temperatures for yad soledes l'chumra: 160, 165, and 175. Interestingly, OU follows the most stringent when it comes to wine even though OU follows 165 for shabos and kashering through iruy.)

2. I'm pretty sure that the Tzelemer Rav's shita of 90C/194F applies to grape juice. For wine, presumably it would be lower. In any event, your observation about wine having to be 14.85% alcohol is misplaced.

3. The KAJ chumra is actually the opinion of Rav Bentzion Abba-Shaul, which is not followed even by most sefardim, as it is rejected by Rav Ovadia Yosef. It is odd that an Ashkenazi hechsher would choose to adopt it.

In order to avoid this confusion, I've noticed a new trend of wine labels specifying the method and/or temperature used to render them mevushal. I think that's a positive trend, as it allows everyone to follow their shita without having to exclude certain hechsherim.

Another difference between hechsherim is whether they allow reias aku"m--for a non-Jew to see the wine prior to bottling. According to Kabbala, wine seen by a non-Jew may not be used for sacramental purposes (kidush, havdala, bircat hamazon, etc.). As far as I know, the major kashrus organizations in the U.S. do not follow this stringency, although the mashgichim in specific locations may require it. For instance, although OU doesn't require it, Capcanes and Elvi are made without being seen by non-Jews due to requirements by the local (Chabad) mashgichim. Also, Israeli wine with a reliable hechsher is almost always made without reias aku"m (since of course it's much easier there on a practical level).

Awards that we receive are sometimes very meaningful, even life defining. Others are less impactful, even utterly insignificant to the course of one's life.

Craig and Elie - I hereby anoint each of you with the award for the longest-standing esoteric discussion of the Jewish laws relating to wine and the organizations that apply them on this forum. The panel of judges has carefully considered other posts on this forum and have unanimously concluded that the competition was not even close.

Adam M wrote:Awards that we receive are sometimes very meaningful, even life defining. Others are less impactful, even utterly insignificant to the course of one's life.

Craig and Elie - I hereby anoint each of you with the award for the longest-standing esoteric discussion of the Jewish laws relating to wine and the organizations that apply them on this forum. The panel of judges has carefully considered other posts on this forum and have unanimously concluded that the competition was not even close.

Mazal tov on your accomplishment and enjoy your award!

Adam,

I think for some Kosher wine drinkers the esoteric discussion of the Jewish laws is as important and necessary as the esoteric discussions around the actual wines. A good portion of this forum is dedicated to nuances so minute that the average wine drinker can't understand or appreciate the differences. Yet, the (broader) forum creates long standing and many times heated discussions around them.

For some, drinking Kosher wines isn't just about doing the minimum or even alleviating guilt. Rather, its a part of what has kept us connected and together for so many years. But more than tradition, its the connection we have between us and G-d, a connection so important, its worth spending time and effort to make sure we are satisfied with the end result. For some, the kashrut is as meaningful as the wine itself.

I'm responding to your comment because of its nature, but this is also one of the large differences I had with Rogov. This is the place for respectful conversation about kashrut related to wines. Nuances are important. Conversation and endless discussion should be encouraged.

Hi Michael - Don't disagree with you AT ALL. If you will notice, not once did I ask that this discuss cease. Even though I have no interest in this topic whatsoever, I fully respect the rights that people have to respectfully discuss what they view as interesting and discussion-worthy onthe topic of kosher or israeli wine. Now, it is WAY off the topic of the post, which I would submit is a little out of line with "discussion forum" norms. But I didn't even complain about that.

Besides being off topic, the thread is incomprehensible to anyone not belonging to a very narrow segment of Jewish society, due to the phraseology and choice of language. Should anyone on this forum wish to engage in such a discussion, I expect of them, at the very least, to make an effort to write it in English and not merely in English characters. A discussion of Jewish law pertaining to wine, should be made in a form suitable for to the forum, not in a manner suitable at a Talmudic Seminary.

Couldn't agree more - the kashrut conversation is off topic. But that wasn't my point.

However, I disagree about the rest of your point/s. First off, Elie and others, in the comments above, made concerted efforts to translate certain terms. Moreover, as someone who grew up Orthodox, educated in fairly open minded Modern Orthodox institutions, lead a fairly typical Modern Orthodox life (as defined roughly by the synthesis outlined by the great Modern Orthodox figure Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik), I was able to understand all (or most) of the terms above. I don't consider myself particularity brilliant or astute, nor rabbinical in anyway. Anecdotally, most of my Conservative Jewish friends understand many of those terms (although none care particularly about kashrut or even exclusively drink kosher wines).

My point being: I think the majority of those who care about kosher will understand those terms. Yes, forum member should make a greater effort to translate for those who don't understand - but who are we fooling? Is there a great number of people out there who care about kashrut and don't understand these terms? I doubt it. And if they don't, why not ask?

I think dialogue around kashrut should reflect something like that at a Talmudic Seminary just as a conversation about cork materials should reflect something from a science class. Look at this thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=44264 - I don't understand half of it - but nor should I - I'm just not that interested in corks. I don't understand what the roughness in the joints between the staves has anything to do with corks - -but if I want to, I can just ask.

Let's be open minded toward all, included those who are focused on staves or the mevushal process. I'm sure occasionally conversations will only be understandable to mad scientists or trained Orthodox rabbis, but I think if we ask nicely, forum member are happy to explain.

Michael

***If anyone has any questions about certain terms mentioned above, including: Modern Orthodox Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, Staves and Joints, or the Mevushal process - all these terms can be typed into Wikipedia for refined explanations.

My apologies to all, and my last word on the subject. And I accept the award, walking down the runway, crying tears of joy while clutching my award.

Elie:

Interesting discussion here, and interesting that it has morphed into this machlokes. The fact is, I think, that we have no machlokes, and that we're saying vaery much the same thing in different ways:

1. The OU does in fact rely on Rav Moshe's shita: "Contemporary poskim address two major questions about Yayin Mevushal (cooked wine). The first is: To what temperature must the wine have been heated to classify it as “cooked”? This is a subject of dispute. The OU’s policy is to follow the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein and require a cooking temperature of 175 degrees F. The second question is: Can we consider pasteurized wine to be Mevushal? Maran Hagaon Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and [l’havdil bein chayyim l’chayyim] Rav Elyashiv maintain (for different reasons) that wine is not to be considered Mevushal merely by dint of being pasteurized. The prevalent practice in America is to follow the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein, who maintains that pasteurized wine is indeed Mevushal."http://www.oukosher.org/index.php/commo ... sekeepers/

Yes, but the lechatchila position is 185. At least, that is what has always been required of me and those I know in the California wine industry.

[quote2. I'm pretty sure that the Tzelemer Rav's shita of 90C/194F applies to grape juice. For wine, presumably it would be lower. In any event, your observation about wine having to be 14.85% alcohol is misplaced.][/quote]

The physical chemistry is well known. Solutes raise the actual boiling point. Grape juice would have a significantly higher boiling point than water, by virtue of the fact that there is so much dissolved sugar. Therefore, if the 90 degree C temperature is specifically for grape juice (with a higher boiling point than water), and the same relationship is maintained with wine (the temperature required decreases [alcohol/water is a mixture of liquids, as opposed to a lovent/solute relationship], as the boiling point decreases to below the boiling point of water), then it tends to prove my point-- and the temperature the Tzelemer requires may actually be no different than the 185 the OU seems to require in fact (as opposed to the the lower temperature they require as stated in the literature). If at 194, only alcohol/water at higher than 14.85% will boil at standard pressure, then at lower temperatures still, only progressively higher alcohol mixtures will boil.

This is a serious machlokes with the gedolei haposkim having weighed in with various opinions. I'm not aware of any shita that wine must reach a rolling boil (ma'ale ababuos) to be considered mevushal. The question is, how hot is considered "cooked." The majority opinion of rishonim is that it must be nechsar--some must be lost to evaporation. (The minority opinion is that any "heated" wine is mevushal even if it's not nechsar.) Rav Moshe's opinion is a big chidush as he extrapolates from hilchos shabos where yad soledes is considered mevushal to wine, where it must be nechsar. Most poskim require that it reach a point where it begins to simmer--i.e., evaporate rapidly. The debate among poskim (aside from Rav Moshe and those--like Rav Auerebach and Rav Elyashiv--who hold that the color and/or taste of the wine must be affected) is at what temperature is there sufficient evaporation to be considered nechsar.

Again, the physical chemistry is clear. A "simmer" occurs in a vessel when the heated layer of liquid reaches the boiling point, when the liquid above may or may not be quite there yet (it must be really close or the bubbles will not get near the top surface. At the boiling point, increased heat increases the rate of boiling, not the temperature of the liquid. We're therefore talking about the boiling point when we talk about a simmer. The wine evaporates rapidly at temperatures leading up to a simmer as well. The definition of a temperature lower than the boiling point at which wine evaporates rapidly vs. slowly indeed is arbitrary. When one sees steam rising off a pot, it is not the vapor but rather the condensate which one sees. Aqueous liquids evaporate even at room temperature , but more as the temperature rises. If one placed a condenser over a pot, one would see the condensation of the vapor. Since we know this the point at which we define loss to evaporation, or evaporating rapidly, is arbitrary. Since it was well known even in Rav Moshe's time, there would presumably be no machlokes between Rav Moshe and the other poskim, except the question of simmering. And as I said earlier, the simmering occurs very close to or identically to the time when the entire pot is in thermal equilibrium at the boiling point. Any point along the way could theoretically be considered cooking.

(Regarding what you said about l'chatchila/b'dieved, Rav Moshe cites 3 different temperatures for yad soledes l'chumra: 160, 165, and 175. Interestingly, OU follows the most stringent when it comes to wine even though OU follows 165 for shabos and kashering through iruy.)

I stand corrected. I thought 160 was a bedieved position, you say it is lechatchila.

[quoteThus, contrary to your conclusion, the choices that should be made are 1) temperature and 2) duration/effect on wine's taste and color--with longer cooking necessary to satisfy Rav Aurebach and Rav Elyashiv's shita. (As an aside, many have already pointed out that Rav Elyashiv's shita is based on misinformation--he writes that he was told that commercial wine is routinely pasteurized, which is simply wrong.) Since almost no one is machmir on 2, the difference between the hechsherim is on 1.][/quote]

I do not know how many mevushal wines carried Rav Auerbach's hechsher, but if any, I am not certain that their shitta fulfils their purpose in this regard, though in many cases, it probably does. But if accomplished through modern continuous processes in a closed system, Rav Auerbach (Zt"l) and Rav Elyashiv (Zt'l) only presume that there has been a noticeable effect, unless the wine is tasted before and after to ascertain the change. It all comes down to the reason for the enactment of wine bishul in the first place-- that the wine must be worse than would be dedicated to idols, or later, worse than would be normally served to nonJews socially. Assuming that the desired flavor is the one before bishul, the presumption is that bishul would somewhat change the flavor profile, making it what we can define as "worse". However, bishul is now factored into the profile of the initial wine, so that if carefully done, changes can be predictable enough to even make the wine "better", bringing it up to the desired flavor profile, even with low technology equipment. I do understand that they did not hold that most mevushal wines were, in fact mevushal.

Thanks, Elie, for this fun and hopefully informative (on both sides) conversation. I hope you see better, now, that we were really saying much the same thing in different ways, and are not at odds at all.

Elie Poltorak wrote:Another difference between hechsherim is whether they allow reias aku"m--for a non-Jew to see the wine prior to bottling. According to Kabbala, wine seen by a non-Jew may not be used for sacramental purposes (kidush, havdala, bircat hamazon, etc.). As far as I know, the major kashrus organizations in the U.S. do not follow this stringency, although the mashgichim in specific locations may require it. For instance, although OU doesn't require it, Capcanes and Elvi are made without being seen by non-Jews due to requirements by the local (Chabad) mashgichim. Also, Israeli wine with a reliable hechsher is almost always made without reias aku"m (since of course it's much easier there on a practical level).

If the above is indeed accurate, then words fail me. And you guys wonder why kosher wines have such a hard time reaching a wider audience...

“Of course we must be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.”Richard Dawkins

It is certainly true that it is a chumra from the Zohar, specifically for the wine in the glass at kiddush, etc. But like everything, people accepted and enlarged it until now, some consumers only want wine from unopened cases, because the wine in the sealed bottle may have been seen by nonJews through the glass (I know, because people requested it of me, despite the fact that the wine was bottled using nonJews in non-contact positions who could certainly have seen the wine). And my own Rav, when he was the poseik for the kof-K, would have required me to have everything out of sight of nonJews, including the crush pad (not easy when the growers are delivering their grapes to the winery in trucks that sit high). He later told me that if he had known how few actually used the chumrah, he never would have required it- mostly Sephardim, and few of those. It did spawn a nice little industry making bottle snoods for Chabadniks, however (at least, those are the only tables at which I have seen them).

I have no knowledge of any wineries outside of California in that regard.

Aahhhh, just as I was about to steer the conversation back to where it started.

My take on QPR is that the discussion of what is quality was quite interesting, as it expressed people's different takes on the subject. My sense of the discussion of price is that for me it was a bit unrealistic. Namely, the price portion of the discussion is a clear function of the depth of one's pockets.

For Shabbat wine, week in and week out, I kept my purchases under $20* for years, by buying only through the local sales periods. The past year or two the marker has moved up to about $22. So the search within that range, for me, is quite focused. For example, the Elvi Matiz, Capcanes Peraj Petita, and Le Mourre de l'Isle fit the bill perfectly. California quality wines are too expensive, and the only candidate for me in the regular Herzog series is the Zinfandel and a couple of the Hagafen whites.

Israeli wines are more complicated. Lots of Israeli wines are priced reasonably in Israel, but not so in the US. So one has to work there; for example, the Dalton Estate Petite Sirah, and the Dalton Viognier (while it lasted) and SB reserve are fine for purchasing within these parameters . Some of the Teperberg as well. Recanati was always a go-to winery, but they are moving some of their wines up out of this price range. Even when the boutique wines are reasonably priced in Israel --- allowing that they are usually more expensive there than comparable wines from large wineries --- they become outrageously overpriced for their quality-level over here.

When I buy wines that are more expensive, they are for special occasions: Yamim Tovim, company who appreciate good wine, ... . On those occasions, I only want that the wine be delicious and stand out from the usual, and not feel that I wasted my money. Overpriced for a special occasion I can live with.

If one has deeper pockets, the upper limit rises, of course. But somehow I sense that, after a certain point in the rise of the upper limit, the discussion loses its "real-world" connection to customers who are purchasing at the high/highest end.

Isaac

*Standard conversation with my wife used to be, "What did you pay for this wine?", "Less than $20", "You mean $19.99?", "Yes."

The last Dalton I had was a Meron Vyd Merlot that tasted like strawberry jelly and I poured it down the drain. Turns out that wine got scored in the low 70s by Wine Spectator. I should really find a bottle of their famous Viognier and try the other entry level wines.